Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio; Redesignation of the Dayton-Springfield 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 45169-45172 [E7-15604]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 155 / Monday, August 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–15587 Filed 8–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0956; FRL–8452–3]
Determination of Attainment, Approval
and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans and Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio;
Redesignation of the DaytonSpringfield 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (Ohio EPA)
submitted a request on November 6,
2006, and supplemented it on
November 29, 2006, December 4, 2006,
December 13, 2006, January 11, 2007,
March 9, 2007, March 27, 2007, and
May 31, 2007, for redesignation of the
Dayton-Springfield, Ohio area (Clark,
Greene, Miami, and Montgomery
Counties) to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. On June 20, 2007, EPA
proposed to approve this submission.
EPA provided a 30-day review and
comment period. The comment period
closed on July 20, 2007. EPA received
one comment in favor of redesignation
from the Dayton area Regional Air
Pollution Control Agency. Today, EPA
is approving Ohio’s request and the
associated plan for continuing to attain
the standard. As part of this action, EPA
is making a determination that the
Dayton-Springfield area has attained the
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). This
determination is based on three years of
complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality monitoring data for the 2004–
2006 ozone seasons that demonstrate
that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been
attained in the area. Preliminary 2007
air quality data show that the area
continues to attain the 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA is approving the
maintenance plan for this area and is
redesignating the area to attainment.
Finally, EPA is approving, for purposes
of transportation conformity, the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for
the years 2005 and 2018.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 13, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0956. All
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Aug 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Kathleen D’Agostino,
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886–
1767 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
following, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or
‘‘our’’ are used, we mean the United
States Environmental Protection
Agency.
Table of Contents
I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
II. What Comments Did We Receive on the
Proposed Action?
III. What Are Our Final Actions?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review
I. What Is the Background for This
Rule?
The background for today’s action is
discussed in detail in EPA’s June 20,
2007, proposal (72 FR 33937). In that
rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour
ozone standard is attained when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm. (See 69 FR 23857
(April 30, 2004) for further information).
The data completeness requirement is
met when the average percent of days
with valid ambient monitoring data is
greater than 90%, and no single year has
less than 75% data completeness, as
determined in accordance with
Appendix I of part 50.
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
may redesignate nonattainment areas to
attainment if sufficient complete,
quality-assured data are available to
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45169
determine that the area has attained the
standard and that it meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
The Ohio EPA submitted a request on
November 6, 2006 and supplemented it
on November 29, 2006, December 4,
2006, December 13, 2006, January 11,
2007, March 9, 2007, March 27, 2007,
and May 31, 2007, for redesignation of
the Dayton-Springfield area (Clark,
Greene, Miami, and Montgomery
Counties) to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. The request included
three years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2004 through
2006, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved. The June 20,
2007 proposed rule provides a detailed
discussion of how Ohio met this and
other CAA requirements.
On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1
Implementation Rule for the 8-hour
Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30,
2004). South Coast Air Quality
Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882
(DC Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in
South Coast Air Quality Management
Dist. v. EPA, Docket No. 04–1201, in
response to several petitions for
rehearing, the DC Circuit clarified that
the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with
regard to those parts of the rule that had
been successfully challenged. Therefore,
the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to
classifications for areas currently
classified under subpart 2 of Title I, part
D of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment
areas, the 8-hour attainment dates, and
the timing for emissions reductions
needed for attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, remain effective. The
June 8 decision left intact the Court’s
rejection of EPA’s reasons for
implementing the 8-hour standard in
certain nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By
limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand
EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour standard
and those anti-backsliding provisions of
the Phase 1 Rule that had not been
successfully challenged. The June 8
decision reaffirmed the December 22,
2006, decision that EPA had improperly
failed to retain four measures required
for 1-hour nonattainment areas under
the anti-backsliding provisions of the
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New
Source Review (NSR) requirements
based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment
classification; (2) Section 185 penalty
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme
nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be
implemented pursuant to section
172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA,
contingent on an area not making
reasonable further progress toward
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
45170
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 155 / Monday, August 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for
failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4)
certain transportation conformity
requirements for certain types of federal
actions. The June 8 decision clarified
that the Court’s reference to conformity
requirements was limited to requiring
the continued use of 1-hour motor
vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour
budgets were available for 8-hour
conformity determinations.
For the reasons set forth in the
proposal, EPA does not believe that the
Court’s rulings alter any requirements
relevant to this redesignation action so
as to preclude redesignation, and do not
prevent EPA from finalizing this
redesignation. EPA believes that the
Court’s December 22, 2006, and June 8,
2007, decisions impose no impediment
to moving forward with redesignation of
this area to attainment, because even in
light of the Court’s decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the
relevant redesignation provisions of the
CAA and longstanding policies
regarding redesignation requests.
With respect to the requirement for
transportation conformity under the 1hour standard, the Court in its June 8
decision clarified that for those areas
with 1-hour motor vehicle emissions
budgets in their maintenance plans,
anti-backsliding requires only that those
1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour
conformity determinations until
replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet
this requirement, conformity
determinations in such areas must
comply with the applicable
requirements of EPA’s conformity
regulations at 40 CFR part 93.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
II. What Comments Did We Receive on
the Proposed Action?
EPA provided a 30-day review and
comment period. The comment period
closed on July 20, 2007. We received
one comment in favor of redesignation
from the Dayton area Regional Air
Pollution Control Agency.
III. What Are Our Final Actions?
EPA is taking several related actions
for the Dayton-Springfield area. First,
EPA is making a determination that the
Dayton-Springfield area has attained the
8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also
approving the State’s request to change
the legal designation of the DaytonSpringfield area from nonattainment to
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Further, EPA is approving Ohio’s
maintenance plan SIP revision for the
Dayton-Springfield area (such approval
being one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation to attainment status).
Finally, for the Dayton Springfield area,
EPA is approving 2005 MVEBs of 29.19
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Aug 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
tpd of Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC) and 63.88 tpd of Oxides of
Nitrogen (NOX) and 2018 MVEBs of
14.73 tpd of VOCs and 21.42 tpd of
NOX.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d),
EPA finds that there is good cause for
these actions to become effective
immediately upon publication. This is
because a delayed effective date is
unnecessary due to the nature of a
redesignation to attainment, which
relieves the area from certain CAA
requirements that would otherwise
apply to it. The immediate effective date
for this action is authorized under both
5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that
rulemaking actions may become
effective less than 30 days after
publication if the rule ‘‘grants or
recognizes an exemption or relieves a
restriction,’’ and section 553(d)(3)
which allows an effective date less than
30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause
found and published with the rule.’’
The purpose of the 30-day waiting
period prescribed in 553(d) is to give
affected parties a reasonable time to
adjust their behavior and prepare before
the final rule takes effect. Today’s rule,
however, does not create any new
regulatory requirements such that
affected parties would need time to
prepare before the rule takes effect.
Rather, today’s rule relieves the State of
planning requirements for these 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas. For these
reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for these actions to
become effective on the date of
publication of these actions.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Review
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
and, therefore, is not subject to review
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy
action,’’ this action is also not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This action merely approves state law
as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
Redesignation of an area to attainment
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean
Air Act does not impose any new
requirements on small entities.
Redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and
does not impose any new regulatory
requirements on sources. Accordingly,
the Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required
by state law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have
Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the
national government and the states, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). Redesignation is an
action that merely affects the status of
a geographical area, and does not
impose any new requirements on
sources, or allows a state to avoid
adopting or implementing additional
requirements, and does not alter the
relationship or distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
45171
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 155 / Monday, August 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area but does not impose
any new requirements on sources. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by October 12, 2007.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review, nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
force its requirements. (See Section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart 1885—Ohio
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by
adding paragraph (ff)(7) to read as
follows:
I
§ 52.1885
Control strategy: Ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(ff) * * *
(7) The Dayton-Springfield area which
includes Clark, Greene, Miami, and
Montgomery Counties, as submitted on
November 6, 2006, and supplemented
on November 29, 2006, December 4,
2006, December 13, 2006, January 11,
2007, March 9, 2007, March 27, 2007,
and May 31, 2007. The maintenance
plan for this area establishes Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for
2005 and 2018. The 2005 MVEBs are
29.19 tpd of VOC and 63.88 tpd of NOX.
The 2018 MVEBs are 14.73 tpd of VOCs
and 21.42 tpd of NOX.
PART 81—[AMENDED]
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Volatile organic
compounds.
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
40 CFR Part 81
4. Section 81.336 is amended by
revising the entry for DaytonSpringfield, Ohio area: Clark, Greene,
Miami, and Montgomery Counties in the
table entitled ‘‘Ohio—Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)’’ to read as follows:
I
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: August 1, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
§ 81.336
Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
I
Ohio.
OHIO—OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD)
Designation a
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
*
*
*
Dayton-Springfield, OH:
Clark County ............................................................
Greene County.
Miami County.
Montgomery County.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
*
*
Type
*
*
*
*
*
*
Attainment.
*
a Includes
1 This
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Aug 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Type
*
August 13, 2007
*
Date 1
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
45172
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 155 / Monday, August 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
[FR Doc. E7–15604 Filed 8–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 575
Table of Contents
[Docket No. NHTSA–2006–25772]
New Car Assessment Program (NCAP);
Safety Labeling
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendments; response to petitions for
reconsideration.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: A provision of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users requires new passenger vehicles
to be labeled with safety rating
information published by the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
under its New Car Assessment Program.
NHTSA was required to issue
regulations to ensure that the labeling
requirements ‘‘are implemented by
September 1, 2007.’’ In September 2006,
we published a final rule to fulfill that
mandate. We received petitions for
reconsideration of the final rule.
Today’s document responds to those
petitions and makes technical
amendments clarifying certain details of
the presentation of the information on
the labels.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective October 12, 2007.
Compliance Date: This final rule
applies to covered vehicles
manufactured on or after September 1,
2007. Optional early compliance by
vehicle manufacturers is permitted
before that date.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of this final rule
must be received not later than
September 27, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration
of the final rule must refer to the docket
number set forth above and be
submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. In addition, a
copy of the petition should be submitted
to: Docket Management, Room W12–
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical issues regarding the
information in this document, please
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:17 Aug 10, 2007
contact Mr. Nathaniel Beuse at (202)
366–1740. For legal issues, please
contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama (202) 366–
2992. Both of these individuals may be
reached by mail at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 211001
I. Overview of SAFETEA–LU Labeling
Provisions and September 2006 Final
Rule
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and
NHTSA’s Response
A. Definition of ‘‘Automobile’’
B. Requirements for Altered Vehicles
III. Technical Adjustments to the Regulatory
Text Related to the Labels
A. Large Safety Label Shown in Figure 1
B. Small Safety Label Shown in Figure 2
IV. Rulemaking Notices and Analyses
Regulatory Text
I. Overview of SAFETEA–LU Labeling
Provisions and September 2006 Final
Rule
Section 10307 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA–LU) 1 requires that
each new passenger automobile that has
been rated under the NHTSA’s New Car
Assessment Program (NCAP) must have
those ratings displayed on a label on its
new vehicle price sticker, known as the
Monroney label.2 SAFETEA–LU
specifies detailed requirements for the
label, including its content, size,
location, and applicability, leaving the
agency only limited discretion regarding
the label.3 It also required NHTSA (by
1 P.L.
109–59 (August 10, 2005); 119 Stat. 1144.
Monroney label is required by the
Automobile Information Disclosure Act (AIDA)
Title 15, United States Code, Chapter 28, Sections
1231–1233. SAFETEA–LU amended AIDA to
require that NCAP ratings be placed on each vehicle
required to have a Monroney label.
3 ‘‘(g) if one or more safety ratings for such
automobile have been assigned and formally
published or released by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration under the New Car
Assessment Program, information about safety
ratings that—
‘‘(1) includes a graphic depiction of the number
of stars, or other applicable rating, that corresponds
to each such assigned safety rating displayed in a
clearly differentiated fashion indicating the
maximum possible safety rating;
‘‘(2) refers to frontal impact crash tests, side
impact crash tests, and rollover resistance tests
(whether or not such automobile has been assigned
a safety rating for such tests);
‘‘(3) contains information describing the nature
and meaning of the crash test data presented and
a reference to additional vehicle safety resources,
including https://www.safecar.gov; and
‘‘(4) is presented in a legible, visible, and
prominent fashion and covers at least—
‘‘(A) 8 percent of the total area of the label; or
‘‘(B) an area with a minimum length of 41⁄2 inches
and a minimum height of 31⁄2 inches; and
2 The
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
delegation of authority from the
Department of Transportation) to issue
regulations to ensure that the new
labeling requirements are implemented
by September 1, 2007.
As required by SAFETEA-LU, on
September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53572) (DOT
Docket No. NHTSA–2006–25772) we
published a final rule that provides that:
(1) New passenger automobiles
manufactured on or after September 1,
2007 must display specified NCAP
information on a safety rating label that
is part of their Monroney label;
(2) The specified information must
include a graphical depiction of the
number of stars achieved by a vehicle
for each safety test;
(3) Information describing the nature
and meaning of the test data, and
references to www.safercar.gov and
NHTSA’s toll-free hotline number for
additional vehicle safety information,
must be placed on the label;
(4) The label must be legible with a
minimum length of 41⁄2 inches and a
minimum width of 31⁄2 inches or 8
percent of the Monroney label,
whichever is larger;
(5) Ratings must be placed on new
vehicles manufactured 30 or more days
after the manufacturer receives
notification from NHTSA of NCAP
ratings for those vehicles.
In its discretion, the agency decided
to require that the label indicate the
existence of safety concerns identified
during NCAP testing, but not reflected
in the resulting NCAP ratings. We
required that the agency’s toll-free
hotline number appear on the label and
adopted specifications for such matters
as the wording, arrangement of some of
the messages and the size of the font.
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and
NHTSA’s Response
In response to the September 12, 2006
final rule, we received a petition for
reconsideration from the Recreation
Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA),
asking us to reconsider the inclusion of
‘‘recreational vehicle’’ in the definition
of ‘‘automobile.’’ A joint petition signed
by the National Automobile Dealers
Association (NADA), the National Truck
Equipment Association (NTEA) and the
National Mobility Equipment Dealers
Association (NMEDA) asked us to
reconsider the requirement of an
additional label for automobiles that are
altered before first sale to the customer.
‘‘(h) if an automobile has not been tested by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
under the New Car Assessment Program, or safety
ratings for such automobile have not been assigned
in one or more rating categories, a statement to that
effect.’’.
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 155 (Monday, August 13, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45169-45172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15604]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0956; FRL-8452-3]
Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Ohio; Redesignation of the Dayton-Springfield 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) submitted
a request on November 6, 2006, and supplemented it on November 29,
2006, December 4, 2006, December 13, 2006, January 11, 2007, March 9,
2007, March 27, 2007, and May 31, 2007, for redesignation of the
Dayton-Springfield, Ohio area (Clark, Greene, Miami, and Montgomery
Counties) to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On June 20,
2007, EPA proposed to approve this submission. EPA provided a 30-day
review and comment period. The comment period closed on July 20, 2007.
EPA received one comment in favor of redesignation from the Dayton area
Regional Air Pollution Control Agency. Today, EPA is approving Ohio's
request and the associated plan for continuing to attain the standard.
As part of this action, EPA is making a determination that the Dayton-
Springfield area has attained the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination is based on three years of
complete, quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the
2004-2006 ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
has been attained in the area. Preliminary 2007 air quality data show
that the area continues to attain the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is
approving the maintenance plan for this area and is redesignating the
area to attainment. Finally, EPA is approving, for purposes of
transportation conformity, the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs)
for the years 2005 and 2018.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 13, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0956. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Kathleen
D'Agostino, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-1767 before visiting
the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the following, whenever ``we,'' ``us,''
or ``our'' are used, we mean the United States Environmental Protection
Agency.
Table of Contents
I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Action?
III. What Are Our Final Actions?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review
I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
The background for today's action is discussed in detail in EPA's
June 20, 2007, proposal (72 FR 33937). In that rulemaking, we noted
that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone
standard is attained when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations is less than
or equal to 0.08 ppm. (See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information). The data completeness requirement is met when the average
percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than 90%,
and no single year has less than 75% data completeness, as determined
in accordance with Appendix I of part 50.
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA may redesignate nonattainment
areas to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and that
it meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section
107(d)(3)(E).
The Ohio EPA submitted a request on November 6, 2006 and
supplemented it on November 29, 2006, December 4, 2006, December 13,
2006, January 11, 2007, March 9, 2007, March 27, 2007, and May 31,
2007, for redesignation of the Dayton-Springfield area (Clark, Greene,
Miami, and Montgomery Counties) to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. The request included three years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2004 through 2006, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS
for ozone had been achieved. The June 20, 2007 proposed rule provides a
detailed discussion of how Ohio met this and other CAA requirements.
On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-
hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast Air
Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006). On June
8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, Docket No.
04-1201, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the DC Circuit
clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to those
parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged. Therefore, the
Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for areas currently
classified under subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour
nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates, and the timing for
emissions reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
remain effective. The June 8 decision left intact the Court's rejection
of EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour standard in certain
nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By limiting
the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA's revocation of the 1-hour
standard and those anti-backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that
had not been successfully challenged. The June 8 decision reaffirmed
the December 22, 2006, decision that EPA had improperly failed to
retain four measures required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the
anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area
New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an area's 1-hour
nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour
severe or extreme nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be implemented
pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, contingent on an
area not making reasonable further progress toward
[[Page 45170]]
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain that NAAQS;
and (4) certain transportation conformity requirements for certain
types of federal actions. The June 8 decision clarified that the
Court's reference to conformity requirements was limited to requiring
the continued use of 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets until 8-
hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity determinations.
For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe
that the Court's rulings alter any requirements relevant to this
redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation, and do not
prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the
Court's December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose no
impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to
attainment, because even in light of the Court's decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation
provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation
requests.
With respect to the requirement for transportation conformity under
the 1-hour standard, the Court in its June 8 decision clarified that
for those areas with 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets in their
maintenance plans, anti-backsliding requires only that those 1-hour
budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity determinations until
replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet this requirement, conformity
determinations in such areas must comply with the applicable
requirements of EPA's conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 93.
II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Action?
EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period. The comment period
closed on July 20, 2007. We received one comment in favor of
redesignation from the Dayton area Regional Air Pollution Control
Agency.
III. What Are Our Final Actions?
EPA is taking several related actions for the Dayton-Springfield
area. First, EPA is making a determination that the Dayton-Springfield
area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also approving the
State's request to change the legal designation of the Dayton-
Springfield area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Further, EPA is approving Ohio's maintenance plan SIP revision
for the Dayton-Springfield area (such approval being one of the CAA
criteria for redesignation to attainment status). Finally, for the
Dayton Springfield area, EPA is approving 2005 MVEBs of 29.19 tpd of
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and 63.88 tpd of Oxides of Nitrogen
(NOX) and 2018 MVEBs of 14.73 tpd of VOCs and 21.42 tpd of
NOX.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds that there is good
cause for these actions to become effective immediately upon
publication. This is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary
due to the nature of a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the
area from certain CAA requirements that would otherwise apply to it.
The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under both 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become
effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule ``grants or
recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction,'' and section
553(d)(3) which allows an effective date less than 30 days after
publication ``as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found
and published with the rule.'' The purpose of the 30-day waiting period
prescribed in 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to
adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect.
Today's rule, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements
such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule
takes effect. Rather, today's rule relieves the State of planning
requirements for these 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas. For these
reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for these
actions to become effective on the date of publication of these
actions.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new
requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new
regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). Redesignation is an action that merely affects the status of
a geographical area, and does not impose any new requirements on
sources, or allows a state to avoid adopting or implementing additional
requirements, and does not alter the relationship or distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.
[[Page 45171]]
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area but does not
impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 12, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review, nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to force its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: August 1, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart 1885--Ohio
0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (ff)(7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(ff) * * *
(7) The Dayton-Springfield area which includes Clark, Greene,
Miami, and Montgomery Counties, as submitted on November 6, 2006, and
supplemented on November 29, 2006, December 4, 2006, December 13, 2006,
January 11, 2007, March 9, 2007, March 27, 2007, and May 31, 2007. The
maintenance plan for this area establishes Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets (MVEB) for 2005 and 2018. The 2005 MVEBs are 29.19 tpd of VOC
and 63.88 tpd of NOX. The 2018 MVEBs are 14.73 tpd of VOCs
and 21.42 tpd of NOX.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
4. Section 81.336 is amended by revising the entry for Dayton-
Springfield, Ohio area: Clark, Greene, Miami, and Montgomery Counties
in the table entitled ``Ohio--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 81.336 Ohio.
Ohio--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Classification
Designated area -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Dayton-Springfield, OH:
Clark County................ August 13, 2007 Attainment.
Greene County...............
Miami County................
Montgomery County...........
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
[[Page 45172]]
[FR Doc. E7-15604 Filed 8-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P